Blix critical of US impatience

“http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2867913.stm

i respect hans blix and was concerned when i read this. inspections were making headway? god, i hope bush made the right decision.”

“You and me both. I hope he was completely right and I have to eat every word I've said against him. I'm pretty sure I won't though, and I'm sad about that.”

“That's about where I am too. I keep using the analogy of having a Dad who bets the rent, your college tuition and grocery money on a horse. It looks to me like a bonehead move, but I am left to hope that it pays off - that he looks brilliant and I am the one who looks boneheaded.”

“Good analogy, ped.

There should be drugs involved in the analogy, though, to represent the profits to be made form iraqi oil.”

“Saddam was playing games all along with the inspectors. He wasn't and never intended to fully cooperate with the guidelines listed in 1441. Military action is justified and necessary. Period.”

“Not according to the UN security council that voted for 1441. You can't have it both ways.

This war is not about WMD or 9/11. Period.”

“I wish I as sure of what I know as Artex seems to be, but I only know what I've heard.”

“There was no way to prove Saddam doesn't have any bad weapons - you can't prove a negative! Artex is right - Saddam was a master at evading the inspectors. They were nothing more than a diplomatic/political pawn, and they did not have the capability to do what they set out to do.”

“If you're using the idea that the inspections were inadequate as a justification for military action, it begs the question of why the inspections weren't made more thoroughly.

One would think, with the resources at our disposal, we could come up with a method of inspection that WOULD be effective.”

“We do have a method that is effective, but it required cooperation from the Iraqi regime. Guess what? They didn't cooperate.”

“If we went in thinking that they would cooporate fully, there wouldn't be a need for inspections, now would there? We could just say: "Please destroy all your weapons, thanks." And they'd say: "sure, no problem." Boom.

Done.

But we are dealing with a tyrant and a dicator. Inspections could be used to force him to disarm completely. We and the world lacked the resolve to see it through.”

“Inspections could be used to force him to disarm completely

This is not at all a certainty.”

“No, it's speculative along the same lines that a democracy will arise in Iraq after the invasion.

It just seems to me, though, that a truly determined inspection regimen could keep the US from having to spend US lives, dollars and international clout on such a venture.

This is, of course, ingnoring the fact that this is really NOT about disarming Saddam Hussein for the greater good.”

“it raises questions, that's all. artex has a good point, but i feel bush has mischaracterized iraq. iraq is not responsible for 9/11, they have never attacked us, there is no evidence they plan too, there is no evidence they helped bin laden. the US is going to run over iraq... and they're a threat to us???? bush bases his argument on "what if's" and "maybe."

i can agree with what we're doing, but i don't agree with how we got here.

war is necessary because hussein is sickeningly evil and highly aggressive towards his neighbors, a man like that cannot have WMD.
but, to say this is a war on terrorism, and tapping into our emotions re: 9/11 to legitimize this war is wrong.”

“Pull up a chair.
Smoke if ya got'em.
This is only the beginning of the war on terrorism.”

“a truly determined inspection regimen could keep the US from having to spend US lives, dollars and international clout on such a venture

I whole-heartedly agree. Bush's diplomacy leaves a lot to be desired. With inspectors in Iraq, the war could have been put on the back burner while we took care of more urgent priorities - North Korea and terrorism, for example.”

“Nicely said jmitch.”

“to say this is a war on terrorism...is wrong

No, you're wrong. A successful invasion of Iraq will definitely create new leverage in the war on terrorism.”

“How long were we to keep inspectors in Iraq, until Saddam died or gave up power?

How many underground bunkers and facilities did the inspectors enter?

What about the three ships that left Iraq back in November and have been circling the Indian Ocean in complete radio silence?
Have inspectors boarded these ships?

If you can hide these weapons from inspectors this easily, how easy would it be to give these weapons to terrorists?”

“Sad Sack has had 12 years to make inspections and disarmement happen and has done nothing but obfuscate, interfere, and order inspectors out of the country. If inspections did not work in 12 years, how much more time would it have taken?”

“... for the terrorists.”

“Only if the state of post-invasion Iraq allows for a government that lends itself to such. There are mixed opinions on this, and it is far from being a certainty. In fact, I would say it is far enough from being a certainty that one could reasonably discount this as a viable motive for the invasion.

Democracy may not be a given. ”

“This is how my post was supposed to look. oops.

Democracy may not be a given. ”

“ Crap.”

“Ain't one of the basic tenets of our society "innocent until proven guilty" ?”

“How US sees post-war Iraq
February 10 2003

The US agenda for post-war Iraq includes a new government, food and health care to its population along with democratic reforms, but no firm timetable for the massive endeavour, a top White House official acknowledged today.

At the same time, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice denied it would rival in scope the post-World War II demilitarisation of Japan under the supervision of US General Douglas MacArthur.

"I don't think that the Douglas MacArthur model is really the appropriate analogy," she said.

Nevertheless, the program calls for a dramatic transformation of Iraq from one of the most brutal totalitarian regimes in the world to a harmonious and united society laying the foundation of its democratic future within secure borders.

"First of all, the United States, if we do have to go to war, I think has no interest in removing one dictator and replacing it with another dictator," said Rice, appearing on CBS's Face the Nation program.

"The Iraqi people deserve better than that."

Once gunfire dies down, the United States will help Iraqis set up a representative civil administration free of the "influence" of the Saddam Hussein era and capable of running the country, according to the Bush adviser.

"We would hope that very early on you could begin to identify Iraqi leadership from within the country and from without, people who underneath this terrible totalitarian government still have the respect of people and could help to lead it," said Rice without disclosing any names.

After the collapse of the Saddam Hussein regime, the Iraqis would have to be given food and humanitarian assistance, while the ministry of health and hospitals must be up and running, she said.

Other US tasks would include ensuring the territorial integrity of Iraq, which has restive Shiite and Kurdish communities, and staving off sectarian violence, Rice pointed out.

She said Washington would remain committed to post-war Iraq for "a period of time" in order to ensure its stability, peace with its neighbours, elimination of its arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and democratic reforms.

But she admitted the administration did not have all the answers as far as Iraq's future was concerned.

"Well, I don't think we know how long it will take," she said.

Meanwhile, 57 per cent of Americans believe if the administration of President George W Bush launches an invasion of Iraq, US troops will have to remain in the country at least two to five years and possibly more, according to a Time/CNN opinion poll made public today.”

“" inspections were making headway"

These "inspections" have been in place for some 12 years now. No fly zones for equally as long. Saddam has place weaponry in these zones, fired upon our aircraft for all these 12 years.

12 years of such headway have led us where?”

“They've reversed that now, LeSubtil. It's guilty until proven innocent. Welcome to the new world order -- USA style!”

“Not that I think it's possible, but what would you all think if Saddam didn't use WMD and none were found after the war?”

“There is a boat-load of speculation going on here.

Mutt says that there are three ships sailing around the Indian Ocean, hmm?

Then he goes on to say that, ..."if you can hide these weapons from inspectors this easily(WHAT WEAPONS ?), how easy would it be to give these weapons(AGAIN, WHAT WEAPONS ?)to terrorists?"

Assuming that people just give away weapons.
And assuming that Hussein would let these imagined weapons fall into the hands of Islamic Whackos....

Hussein is an Infidel to the Taliban.

That's a hell of a lot of speculation, along with all the other speculative talk.

Its not enough to enter into a war.”

“Indiana:

I had this discussion with the SO last night and the conclusion we came to was:

a) Some Americans will realize they were BSed into supporting a war;

b) they won't care because their narrow view of "threat" has been eliminated -- for the time being.”

“Hey tommy, just say no to drugs.”

“it is what it is, just hope for the best, the safety of our troops and civilians. it's possible good can come out of this.”

“Thank you Mr. Peanut(Pecker)”

“Mutt says...

No, I didn't say anything so stupid!”

“I certainly do hope it ends.................well.”

“OOps!

Sorry Mutt!!

All this scrolling up and down.......and of course, too much CRACK!”

“"No, I didn't say anything so stupid!"

Yes you have.”

“Not a problem, Tom. I just didn't want to be confused with that fountain of ignorance, Ultrapecker.”

“Your pride is shameful Mutt.”

“lol! I didn't realize you had a sense of humor.”

“Most vets do.”

“We seemed to be getting much improved results from ispections, as soon as we had 250,000 armed soldiers on Iraq's borders, along with hundreds of Abrams tanks and plenty of helos and cruise missiles and fighters and bombers, all ready to march to Bahgdad. Do you really call that progress and cooperation?

9/11 proved that there are people and organizations in the world who will not hesitate to use all the force they can get on our soil to destroy us as a culture, as a government, as a population, as a civilization.

A U.S. citizen accused of a crime is innocent until proven guilty. That is a promise from our government to our CITIZENS. It is not a promise to a foreign dictator who has the money and desire to acquire WMDs, won't hesitate to use them on Israel, the U.S., his own people or his neighbors, and will probably give them to the terrorists who will deliver them to our soil. Sorry, but a prudent U.S. leader would not give him that benefit of the doubt.

Destroying 2 buildings in NY killed about 3000 people, and closed maybe 1000 businesses ( I'm guessing). That resulted in a loss of XX trillions of $ in the value of our investments and companies, which resulted in the loss of XX number of jobs, which resulted in X families being in severe economic shape in the US and the countries we buy from.

By comparison, the result of the entire city of NY being destroyed (or Baltimore, LA, Seattle, Altanta) would be incalculable. That huge risk justifies taking some risk to prevent that possibility.

I don't understand why this logic escapes so many people.”

“Very well said Idaho Bob. I 100% agree, and also can't understand why people fail to see the logic.”

“"The US agenda for post-war Iraq includes a new government, food and health care to its population along with democratic reforms, but no firm timetable for the massive endeavour, a top White House official acknowledged today."

It's nice that Bush is promising health care to the Iraqi population. They'll call him Hillary Clinton in Iraq.”

“Sodamy said he destroyed all his WMD...he just don't have any prove of it. He's lying and jerking the inspectors and the world community around. This war is about regime change and freeing the Iraqi people...plus a big profit from the oil industry doesn't hurt.”